Court orders Indonesian govt to provide free basic education in all schools
JAKARTA: The government is obligated to provide free education at the elementary level in both public and private schools, the Constitutional Court has said in its ruling on a judicial review petition against the 2003 National Education System (Sisdiknas) Law filed by an education watchdog.
During a hearing on Tuesday, court justices read their conclusion that the implementation of Article 34 paragraph 2 of the 2003 law, which stipulates that basic education should be free of charge, was not inclusive of all as it has only been applied to public schools.
In the Sisdiknas Law, the basic education level covers elementary and junior high school, including their equivalent in madrassas.
The justices also noted that while the government provided funding to provide free education in public elementary schools, it failed to take notice of the limited capacity of these schools, which forced many students to enroll in private schools that charge for tuition. Such a situation, the court added, went against the state's obligation as stipulated in the law
'The state must implement a basic education financing policy that [covers] students in public and private schools as well as madrassas, through educational assistance mechanisms or subsidies, so that there won't be any gap in access to basic education,' Justice Enny Nurbaningsih said, reading the ruling on Tuesday (May 27).
Free elementary education, the justice continued, is part of the economic, social and cultural rights of a citizen, which can be fulfilled 'gradually, selectively and affirmatively without being discriminatory' depending on the state's capacity.
However, the court justices acknowledged that there are private schools offering additional curricula beyond that required by the government, such as international or religious schools.
Enny said the government should not force these institutions to provide free education for their students, whose parents are aware of the tuition obligations of enrolling in such schools.
Considering the state's limited capacity to fund students for their basic education, Justice Enny said the government should draw up a funding plan that prioritizes basic education needs in private schools that fulfill the criteria for such financial assistance.
The court also urged private schools to help ease tuition costs for their students, especially in 'areas where there are no state-funded schools around'.
The judicial review petition challenging the 2003 Sisdiknas Law was submitted in December 2023 by the Network for Education Watch Indonesia (JPPI).
The plaintiff contested the phrase of 'compulsory basic education at least in the basic level without any charges' in Article 34 paragraph 2 of the law, arguing it should also apply for students in private schools. - The Jakarta Post/ANN
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Free Malaysia Today
17 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Zaid, 2 others lose defamation suit against Malaysian Bar
The High Court ruled that Zaid Ibrahim and two others had failed to prove their case against the defendants on a balance of probabilities. KUALA LUMPUR : The High Court has dismissed a libel suit filed by Zaid Ibrahim and two others against a former Malaysian Bar president over her statement on their conduct during Najib Razak's final appeal in the SRC International case. Justice Roz Mawar Rozain said the former law minister, who is now a lawyer, and counsel Liew Teck Huat and Rueben Mathiavaranam had failed to prove their case against the defendants on a balance of probabilities. 'The statement had not lowered their reputation in the eyes of an ordinary person,' Roz Mawar said in her oral judgment read out in court today. She also dismissed the plaintiffs' suit for conspiracy to injure and breach of statutory duty under the Legal Profession Act 1976. Lawyer Andrew Chiew, who appeared for the Bar and its then president, Karen Cheah, did not ask for costs. 'We are extending the olive branch and hope the matter ends here,' he said. Roz Mawar said while the defendants were magnanimous, nothing could stop the plaintiffs from appealing the case. Zaid, Liew and Mathiavaranam had on Sept 30, 2022, filed the suit against the Bar and Cheah for allegedly defaming them over their conduct in the appeal. They claim that a media statement, which Cheah issued on Aug 19, 2022 titled 'Abuse of process brings disrepute to our justice system', implied that they had 'undermined the justice system through unscrupulous strategies'. The statement was published by several media organisations on the same day, they said. The plaintiffs said the words in the press statement were calculated to 'disparage, besmirch and damn' them in their professional capacities as advocates and solicitors having conduct of appeals and applications in the Federal Court. Najib had on July 25, 2002 appointed Zaid's law firm to replace Shafee & Co as solicitors in his final SRC International criminal appeal before the Federal Court, with Hisyam Teh Poh Teik replacing Shafee Abdullah as lead counsel. Roz Mawar said the press statement did identify the plaintiffs and was published, but did not establish that the words, in their natural and ordinary meaning, were defamatory. She said the plaintiffs themselves had, before the publication, made multiple public disclosures, including press interviews, social media postings and commentaries. 'They had admitted their lack of readiness, criticising prior counsel and seeking adjournments which were ultimately refused by the Federal Court,' she said. Roz Mawar said she found that by Aug 19, 2022, the reputational position of the plaintiffs had already been shaped by facts in the public domain. She said the court also found no evidence to support the plaintiffs' claim of conspiracy to injure. 'There is no actionable breach (of statutory duty) or specific compensable loss that has been proven to flow from the alleged breach,' she said.
The Sun
a day ago
- The Sun
Ecuador apologizes to farm workers deemed to live like slaves
QUITO: Ecuador's government apologized Saturday to some 300 people who worked as farmers for a Japanese textile firm in conditions which a court likened to modern-day slavery. These people worked on plantations that produced abaca, a fiber used in textiles and the auto industry. As of 2021, Furukawa's plantations for abaca covered almost 23,000 hectares spread over three provinces on the Pacific coast, where the majority of the population is Black. Some workers gave birth to children in unsanitary and overcrowded camps, while others were denied proper medical attention after work-related injuries, according to testimony given at a news conference in Quito back in December. That month the Constitutional Court ordered Furukawa to pay $120,000 to each of 342 victims -- a total of around $41 million. The company was also ordered to make a public apology to them. It has not complied with either order. The court said that over the course of five years Furukawa had people living in conditions of modern-day slavery in its abaca fields. It also ordered the government to apologize to the workers, and that is what happened Saturday. The company violated 'national and international regulations that affected, in essence, human dignity,' Labor Minister Ivonne Nunez said. She said 'the state, through the various ministries, as the sentence explains, turned a deaf ear' to the plight of the abused workers. Nunez spoke at a ceremony with other government ministers at Quito's Independence Plaza, as ex-Furukawa workers chanted slogans such as 'reparations, reparations' and 'modern slavery, never again.' After the court ruling, Furukawa said it does not have the money to pay the damages ordered by the tribunal and called them disproportionate. Back in December, at a meeting at a human rights group's headquarters, plantation workers told horror stories of their lives raising abaca. 'We have been confronting the monster that is Furukawa,' Segundo Ordonez, a 59-year-old farmer, said at the meeting.
Free Malaysia Today
2 days ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Ex-Guatemalan paramilitaries jailed for raping indigenous women
The former paramilitaries were found guilty of raping six indigenous women between 1981 and 1983. (EPA Images pic) GUATEMALA CITY : A top Guatemalan court today sentenced three former paramilitaries each to 40 years in prison after they were found guilty of raping six indigenous women between 1981 and 1983, the bloodiest period of the Central American nation's civil war. The trial against the former members of the so-called civil self-defence patrol, armed groups recruited by the army, began four months ago. 'The soldiers arrived late at night, threw me onto the ground and raped me,' Paulina Ixpata, a Maya Achi woman, said during the trial. Prosecutors presented more than 160 pieces of evidence against the men. 'That's how the whole night went,' Ixpata said, recounting how she was held for 25 days by the military patrol. Judge Maria Eugenia Castellanos sentenced the three for crimes against humanity in the form of sexual violence. 'The women recognised the perpetrators, they recognised the places where the events took place. They were victims of crimes against humanity,' she said. This is the second trial in the so-called Maya Achi case, and follows reports of sexual violence filed between 2011 and 2015 by 36 victims against former military personnel, military commissioners and civilian self-defence patrol members. The first trial, which took place in January 2022, saw five former patrol members sentenced to 30 years in prison. They remain incarcerated. In 2016, a Guatemalan court sentenced two former military officers for holding 15 women from the Q'eqchi community, who are also of Maya origin, as sex slaves at the Sepur Zarco military base, a landmark case that marked the first convictions in Guatemala of military officers for wartime rape. Both officers were sentenced to a combined 360 years in prison, where they remain incarcerated. The court also stipulated a reparations programme, whose progress remains limited despite advocacy by the 15 women who were at the trial, known as the 'Grandmothers of Sepur Zarco'.
